Barry Law Review Volume 19 Article 7 Issue 1 Fall 2013 2013 Law and Policy in the Global Space Industry's Lift- Off Claudia Pastorius Follow this and additional works at: https://lawpublications.barry.edu/barrylrev Part of the Air and Space Law Commons, International Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Claudia Pastorius (2013) "Law and Policy in the Global Space Industry's Lift-Off," Barry Law Review: Vol. 19 : Iss. 1 , Article 7. Available at: https://lawpublications.barry.edu/barrylrev/vol19/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Barry Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Barry Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Barry Law. : The Global Space Industry's Lift-Off LAW AND POLICY IN THE GLOBAL SPACE INDUSTRY’S LIFT-OFF Claudia Pastorius* PART I: INTRODUCTION—WHO OWNS SPACE? Would Hugo Grotius1 call for freedom of space? Would John Locke2 postulate that man will create value by the work of his hands in space and on celestial bodies and that this value carries with it an inherent right of ownership? When we look up with cosmic wonder, do we see spatium liberum,3 spatium nullius,4 or spatium communis5? Locke’s influential writings and labor theory of property have been used to justify colonization and property laws for centuries.6 Although he refers to the Earth,7 the heart of his principles is highly applicable to an inquiry of what space property law should be. In the excerpt below from his writing on property rights, we can see applicability to commercial space development projects of today. Though the earth and all inferior creatures be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this nobody has any right to but himself. The labour of his body and the work of his hands we may say are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his ________________________ * J.D., Barry University School of Law. B.A., International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. The author would like to give a special thank you to Hannah Pastorius for her inspiration and patience. For more information, email [email protected]. 1. HUGO GROTIUS, MARE LIBERUM [THE FREEDOM OF THE SEAS] (James Brown Scott ed., Ralph van Deman Magoffin trans., 1916). 2. JOHN LOCKE, THE SECOND TREATISE OF GOVERNMENT AND A LETTER CONCERNING TOLERATION 12– 13 (Tom Crawford ed., Dover Thrift 2002) (1689). Occupancy and value-added are significant elements of Locke’s labor theory of the acquisition of real property rights. See generally id. 3. Here, spatium liberum—freedom of space—references Grotius’ mare liberum principle known as the freedom of the seas. See Grotius, supra note 1. Under mare liberum the right to the high seas remains the province of all humanity, to be appropriated or limited by none. See id. 4. Spatium nullius—space zero—references the concept of res nullius. “Res nullius are things belonging to no one. In the Roman sources they are discussed in the context of modes of acquisition of ownership (dominium). Things that belong to no one are susceptible to being acquired by taking (occupatio).” Lauren Benton & Benjamin Straumann, Acquiring Empire by Law: From Roman Doctrine to Early Modern European Practice, 28 LAW & HIST. REV. 1, 14 (2010) (charting the development of the legal phrase terra nullius from res nullius in legal writings justifying colonization). 5. Spatium communis—community space—refers to the concept of res communis (property subject to community use and enjoyment, but that may not be appropriated). Nowlan, infra note 86, at 122; Baslar, infra note 255, at 39–40. 6. See LOCKE, supra note 2 and accompanying text. 7. See generally id. 201 Published by Digital Commons @ Barry Law, 2013 1 Barry Law Review, Vol. 19, Iss. 1 [2013], Art. 7 202 Barry Law Review Vol. 19, No. 1 own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men. For this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to, at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others.8 The first emphasized phrase, “removes out of the state that nature hath provided,” can be applied to space mining rights of minerals and elements on asteroids and the moon.9 In the second emphasized phrase, “it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men,” what is annexed could be modular housing developments on the surface of Mars,10 additions to Earth’s geostationary orbit like satellites,11 or outer space hotels.12 The third emphasized phrase, “at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others“ introduces a caveat of Locke’s labor theory that modifies the idea that property rights are inherently acquired through labor in situations where the scarcity of property and the impact of appropriation on others is an issue.13 We each gaze at the same moon at night, there being only one—is its appropriation limited to the extent that it can remain viable for the common use and enjoyment of mankind? The global space industry’s development has a critical stake in the timeless question—Who owns space? A proactive answer to the question of property rights in space could set a course that optimizes the development of humanity and our expansion into outer space. There is no generally accepted regime for the acknowledgement or conferment of property rights in space.14 Whether property rights in space exist in international law is a subject of scholarly debate.15 Today, the commercial viability of the appropriation of space property is rapidly bringing these issues to a head.16 Resolution of legal rights in space property could come reactively from the outcome of controversies arising from ambiguous international ________________________ 8. LOCKE, supra note 2, (emphasis added). 9. Id.; See also Klingler, infra note 145; see also China Aims for Lunar Base After 2020, infra note 61. 10. LOCKE, supra note 2; see also About Mars One, infra note 172. 11. See, e.g., Which Countries Were First to Launch Satellites?, infra note 26. 12. See, e.g., Malik, infra note 120. 13. LOCKE, supra note 2; see also Baslar, infra note 255 (analyzing the effect of scarcity on property rights). 14. See, e.g., Alan Wasser & Douglas Jobes, Space Settlements, Property Rights, and International Law: Could A Lunar Settlement Claim the Lunar Real Estate It Needs to Survive?, 73 J. AIR L. & COM. 37, 40 (2008) ; but see Kurt Anderson Baca, Property Rights in Outer Space, 58 J. AIR L. & COM. 1041, 1082 (1993) (examining the International Telecommunications Union’s (ITU) regime for regulating satellite orbit slots). 15. See, e.g., Blake Gilson, Defending Your Client’s Property Rights in Space: A Practical Guide for the Lunar Litigator, 80 FORDHAM L. REV. 1367 (2011) (giving an overview of the ambiguity regarding space property rights in the Outer Space Treaty, the different interpretations, examining property rights models around the world, and predicting lunar litigation outcomes in various jurisdictions). 16. See Gruner, infra note 210. https://lawpublications.barry.edu/barrylrev/vol19/iss1/7 2 : The Global Space Industry's Lift-Off Fall 2013 The Global Space Industry's Lift-Off 203 law on the matter,17 or proactively through unilateral actions18 or multilateral international agreement.19 Space law20 and policy development, including the regulation of property rights in space, must take many issues into consideration: (1) how to ensure the safety and security of mankind as private access to outer space increases; (2) how to ensure economic justice for all in the regulation of commercial space enterprises; and (3) how to plan for interplanetary development and space property rights, anticipating that one day government, non-profit, and private space colonization efforts will become sustainable and independent from Earth.21 This article provides an overview of current developments in the commercial space industry and touches upon unsettled legal issues in space law and space property rights in particular. Grabbing the space bull22 by the horns, we depart from the ideas introduced in Part I into an analysis of the security risks, environmental hazards, and economic opportunities associated with the development of the commercial space industry. Part II gives an overview of past and present commercial and nation-state space development activities. Part III addresses the reasons underlying the ambiguity regarding space property rights in the major source of space law, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, and proposes that the international community reconsider the benefits of a public trust concept. Part IV examines the policy considerations of (1) safety and security; (2) economic justice; and (3) interplanetary rights in global space law development—with an eye on efficient and equitable23 outcomes. Part V briefly synthesizes the facts, laws, and policy considerations discussed in this article to highlight the common goals of nation-states, commercial actors, and humanity in the global space industry development. Part VI concludes with the observation that the choices we make in global space law development today can impact the future of the human race. ________________________ 17. Gilson, supra note 15. 18. Wayne N. White, Jr., Implications of a Proposal for Real Property Rights in Outer Space, PROC.